The corruption of the system has been so overt and so widespread that he must fight to the bitter end to try and prevent a Republican president appointing the next Atorny General and head of the FBI.
Actually, Bush would probably leave Loius Freeh in office. After all, he's one of the people who kept pressing Reno to investigate the Buddist temple "fundraiser".
Huh? That doesn't make any sense. First of all, the Electoral College gives disproportially high representation to the very small, sparesly populated votes. States like North & South Dakota have the (minimum) 3 electoral votes, but somewhat less than the population that should be supporting those votes.
Right. North Dakota has 3 Electoral votes, or just over 1/2 of one percent of the Electoral Collage. If we allocated based on population alone, they would only have one Electoral vote vs California's 53. The politicians have little reason to go to states like North Dakota... Do you actually want to give them less?
Also, in a democracy, if 2/3rds of the country lives in dense urban settlement, why shouldn't they exercise control over the government? Democracy is essentially the tyranny of the majority. Doesn't make it a perfect system, but it is silly to argue that because the a lot of people believe something, we should reduce their say.
Darn good thing we don't live in a democracy then, isn't it?
The United States was set up as a Republic. The reason we don't use the system you describe is because the Founding Fathers, for whatever reason, decided not to do so. And guess what? It's worked pretty well so far.
As for the economy, the Regan Era (including his "third term" under Daddy Bush) was an unmitigated economic disaster. The recovery started almost the day GBSr left office, and has continued unabated ever since.
I'm just going to reply to this one point.
Economic reform takes anywhere from 4-12 years to implement. The economy does not turn around overnight.
Regean inherited the economic mess created by Ford and Carter, and the political mess created by Carter. And he managed, for the most part, to turn them around.
And, no, I'm not a Republican, I'm a registered Independant.
The governor's signature isn't even required to pass a bill into law!
Shh... the President's isn't either....
Yes, but in Texas - unless the Governor vetoes it the bill becomes law
You know, from what I remember from my High School civics class, that's also how it works with the bills on the President's desk.
IIRC, he's got something like 10 working days to either sign or veto a bill. If he doesn't do either, it becomes law.
Again, IIRC, this was made a law because of presidents who would get bills passed by the Legislature, but wouldn't ever sign them or veto them (presumablly because the veto would be overridden).
Yeah, but we're also the country with the highest rate of execustions, so Amendment VIII is already out the window.
But executions are not necessarily cruel or unusual.
They certainly weren't considered such when the Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution. In fact, the 5th Amendment specifically allows for executions, as long as due process has been followed.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
So, it's perfectly legal to have exections.
Now, some methods of execution may be seen as cruel or unusual. Feeding someone feet first into a chipper-shredder, for instance.
But hanging, firing squad, lethal injection, gas chambers, and electrocution have all been found to be legal.
So far so good, but consider this: Suppose there are 100 people in each district. In district one, 51 people vote for Bush and 49 people vote for Buchanan. In district two, 51 people vote for Gore, and 49 people vote for Buchanan. Buchanan didn't win either district, yet he gets two electoral votes while Bush and Gore each get one.
Which would produce 'statewide' totals of:
Buchanan: 98 votes / 49%
Gore: 51 votes / 25.5%
Bush: 51 votes / 25.5%
So the guy with almost 50% of the votes get 50% of the electors, whereas the two with 25% of the vote get one elector each...
What's wrong with that? Or am I missing something?
What would be MUCH better would be for all the states to split their EC votes ala Maine. Then the smaller states would get to keep their unfair influence over the election, but the EC votes would much more accurately reflect the popular vote. Not completely fair, true, but vastly more likely to happen (especially after this year's fiasco).
Since the person reading over my shoulder is having so much problem with this paragraph, I'm going to rephrase it for the faint of thought.
For states with more than 3 EC votes (i.e., more than one Representative), divide all but two EC votes into the same districts that the Representatives have, with each district selecting its Elector based off of the results of the vote for that district.
The two 'Senatorial' Electors would go to whoever won the state.
For states with only one Representative, the Senatorial Electors would be the ones split up, with the Representative Elector going to whoever wins the state.
Classically, science fiction is split into 2 camps. There's the real-world variety (Arthur C. Clarke, Kim Stanley Robinson, etc) which is true science fiction (sometimes called "hard" science fiction), and then there's the fantasy variety - Star Wars, Buck Rogers, etc. The fantasy variety is known as "space opera".
Such as Fifth Element, which is, AFAIK, the only movie to actually have space opera.:)
The best point of the article...
on
Hacking The City
·
· Score: 2
...is that he's doing what he always wanted to.
Succeed or fail, that's more important than any other point in the thing...
For example, split up the Electoral vote in each state; if a state has more than three votes, have each elector represent a piece of the state corresponding to a House member. The 'Senator' electors go to whoever wins the popular vote.
For states with only three Electoral votes, split up the votes by 'Senator' chunks, and give the 'Representative' seat to whoever wins the state.
This would preserve the Electoral Collage, but lead to a greater measure of 'popular' control.
Of course, it would require some redesign of local elections, as some counties are likely split by certain Reps...
I don't ask that we don't elect criminals to office. We can't. Everyone at that level is corrupt in one way or another.
All I ask is that we elect competent crooks. And is that really so much?
Re:The current system is rigged.
on
eLection '04
·
· Score: 1
That, and I remember reading about a case where some candidate got a hold of a copy of the ballot ahead of time, had about 100 extra copies made (it was for a small town vote) and when he cast his vote, he dropped in the other hundred - all coincidentally voting for him.
It got caught when the vote counter realized that 60 more people had voted than were registered.
I did say, "IIRC". In a couple of places I've lived, you actually couldn't show the real ballot. This didn't stop the political parties or the newspapers from coming up with 'mock' ballots indicating either what the issues were (news) or how you should vote (parties).
Besides, if truth be told, I really don't care about the outcome of this election, other than who the VP will be.
Or am I the only one who remembers the 'zero' curse?:)
I know that they aren't allowed to vote, but, IMO, they are qualified and should be allowed.
No, they aren't qualified. They may be eligable to vote because they meet the age criteria, but the very fact that they are a convicted felon disqualifies them.
I've seen the Palm Beach County ballots in question and can easily see how people were misled, especially considering the voters were given a different ballot layout in advance.
Minor point, but they were given a different sample ballot outside by pollsters/campaigners. IIRC, absentee aside, you don't get a look at the ballot ahead of time... You might know what is one it, but not the actual layout.
Slashdot Mirror
The corruption of the system has been so overt and so widespread that he must fight to the bitter end to try and prevent a Republican president appointing the next Atorny General and head of the FBI.
Actually, Bush would probably leave Loius Freeh in office. After all, he's one of the people who kept pressing Reno to investigate the Buddist temple "fundraiser".
Huh? That doesn't make any sense. First of all, the Electoral College gives disproportially high representation to the very small, sparesly populated votes. States like North & South Dakota have the (minimum) 3 electoral votes, but somewhat less than the population that should be supporting those votes.
Right. North Dakota has 3 Electoral votes, or just over 1/2 of one percent of the Electoral Collage. If we allocated based on population alone, they would only have one Electoral vote vs California's 53. The politicians have little reason to go to states like North Dakota... Do you actually want to give them less?
Also, in a democracy, if 2/3rds of the country lives in dense urban settlement, why shouldn't they exercise control over the government? Democracy is essentially the tyranny of the majority. Doesn't make it a perfect system, but it is silly to argue that because the a lot of people believe something, we should reduce their say.
Darn good thing we don't live in a democracy then, isn't it?
The United States was set up as a Republic. The reason we don't use the system you describe is because the Founding Fathers, for whatever reason, decided not to do so. And guess what? It's worked pretty well so far.
As for the economy, the Regan Era (including his "third term" under Daddy Bush) was an unmitigated economic disaster. The recovery started almost the day GBSr left office, and has continued unabated ever since.
I'm just going to reply to this one point.
Economic reform takes anywhere from 4-12 years to implement. The economy does not turn around overnight.
Regean inherited the economic mess created by Ford and Carter, and the political mess created by Carter. And he managed, for the most part, to turn them around.
And, no, I'm not a Republican, I'm a registered Independant.
The governor's signature isn't even required to pass a bill into law!
Shh... the President's isn't either....
Yes, but in Texas - unless the Governor vetoes it the bill becomes law
You know, from what I remember from my High School civics class, that's also how it works with the bills on the President's desk.
IIRC, he's got something like 10 working days to either sign or veto a bill. If he doesn't do either, it becomes law.
Again, IIRC, this was made a law because of presidents who would get bills passed by the Legislature, but wouldn't ever sign them or veto them (presumablly because the veto would be overridden).
Bryce 4. And while Ray Dream Studio would be nice, I think I could live without it.
What more do people need to switch to Linux or MacOSX?
I need my ISP to support Linux, and I need only one more program to be ported over to Linux before I switch...
is like hunting sea turtles. When they are laying eggs. On a beach. With a machine gun.
:)
Add an undermounted grenade launcher, and you've got the Obfuscated LISP contest.
Yeah, but we're also the country with the highest rate of execustions, so Amendment VIII is already out the window.
But executions are not necessarily cruel or unusual.
They certainly weren't considered such when the Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution. In fact, the 5th Amendment specifically allows for executions, as long as due process has been followed.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
So, it's perfectly legal to have exections.
Now, some methods of execution may be seen as cruel or unusual. Feeding someone feet first into a chipper-shredder, for instance.
But hanging, firing squad, lethal injection, gas chambers, and electrocution have all been found to be legal.
I didn't even see a woman in any of the pictures...
Check that, I found one. Kinda like the "Where's Waldo?" of the techgeek convention... "Where's Woman?"...
(Hint: Look on page 4)
Yes, I know I'm being silly. It's that kind of day.
As for geek porn, I'm sick of seeing scantily clad porn stars holding Cisco routers and 1U servers
Dude, did you even look at the pictures?
I didn't even see a woman in any of the pictures...
Tho, there were some scantily clad processors...
Look at the racks on that baby going to Duke!
:)
Sorry... Couldn't help it...
Which would produce 'statewide' totals of:
Buchanan: 98 votes / 49%
Gore: 51 votes / 25.5%
Bush: 51 votes / 25.5%
So the guy with almost 50% of the votes get 50% of the electors, whereas the two with 25% of the vote get one elector each...
What's wrong with that? Or am I missing something?
What would be MUCH better would be for all the states to split their EC votes ala Maine. Then the smaller states would get to keep their unfair influence over the election, but the EC votes would much more accurately reflect the popular vote. Not completely fair, true, but vastly more likely to happen (especially after this year's fiasco).
Since the person reading over my shoulder is having so much problem with this paragraph, I'm going to rephrase it for the faint of thought.
For states with more than 3 EC votes (i.e., more than one Representative), divide all but two EC votes into the same districts that the Representatives have, with each district selecting its Elector based off of the results of the vote for that district.
The two 'Senatorial' Electors would go to whoever won the state.
For states with only one Representative, the Senatorial Electors would be the ones split up, with the Representative Elector going to whoever wins the state.
Classically, science fiction is split into 2 camps. There's the real-world variety (Arthur C. Clarke, Kim Stanley Robinson, etc) which is true science fiction (sometimes called "hard" science fiction), and then there's the fantasy variety - Star Wars, Buck Rogers, etc. The fantasy variety is known as "space opera".
:)
Such as Fifth Element, which is, AFAIK, the only movie to actually have space opera.
...is that he's doing what he always wanted to.
Succeed or fail, that's more important than any other point in the thing...
Not to say that the process couldn't be improved.
For example, split up the Electoral vote in each state; if a state has more than three votes, have each elector represent a piece of the state corresponding to a House member. The 'Senator' electors go to whoever wins the popular vote.
For states with only three Electoral votes, split up the votes by 'Senator' chunks, and give the 'Representative' seat to whoever wins the state.
This would preserve the Electoral Collage, but lead to a greater measure of 'popular' control.
Of course, it would require some redesign of local elections, as some counties are likely split by certain Reps...
I don't ask that we don't elect criminals to office. We can't. Everyone at that level is corrupt in one way or another.
All I ask is that we elect competent crooks. And is that really so much?
That, and I remember reading about a case where some candidate got a hold of a copy of the ballot ahead of time, had about 100 extra copies made (it was for a small town vote) and when he cast his vote, he dropped in the other hundred - all coincidentally voting for him.
It got caught when the vote counter realized that 60 more people had voted than were registered.
The Java platform is far more open than MS.Nyet
And Apache has the JSP as open source. Doesn't sound like Handcuffs to me...
...is that the Dead allowed people to record whatever they wanted at their concerts.
Usually, a special area was set up specifically for this purpose.
Now, most of these dupes were traded rather than sold, but still...
I did say, "IIRC". In a couple of places I've lived, you actually couldn't show the real ballot. This didn't stop the political parties or the newspapers from coming up with 'mock' ballots indicating either what the issues were (news) or how you should vote (parties).
:)
Besides, if truth be told, I really don't care about the outcome of this election, other than who the VP will be.
Or am I the only one who remembers the 'zero' curse?
I know that they aren't allowed to vote, but, IMO, they are qualified and should be allowed.
No, they aren't qualified. They may be eligable to vote because they meet the age criteria, but the very fact that they are a convicted felon disqualifies them.
I've seen the Palm Beach County ballots in question and can easily see how people were misled, especially considering the voters were given a different ballot layout in advance.
Minor point, but they were given a different sample ballot outside by pollsters/campaigners. IIRC, absentee aside, you don't get a look at the ballot ahead of time... You might know what is one it, but not the actual layout.
Just because the release of 6 has some bugs doesnt mean they shouldnt release it.
After all, known bugs never stopped MS, did it?
They released W:ME with, what was it, 63K known bugs? And who knows how many unknown ones.
The dozen or so that Flanagan listed don't bother me quite as much...
...who thinks that a story about dinosaurs is somehow appropriate for election day?